Free Market Alert!

Many medical practitioners have apparently simply had enough. Instead of continuing their never-ending struggle with the welfare state's red tape, they have decided to revert to a free market model without insurance. At first glance that seems to represent a barrier to obtaining medical care for poorer strata of the population. However, a second glance reveals that this might actually not be the case. No doubt to the great dismay of the sick-care cartel and the bureaucracy administering it, the refreshing breeze of the free market suddenly intruding upon the system shows what prices actually would be if the State were not involved in health care. According to a recent report on the spreading 'cash only' medical care phenomenon:

“Fed up with declining payments and rising red tape, a small but growing number of doctors are opting out of the insurance system completely. They’re expecting patients to pony up with cash. Some doctors who have gone that route love it, saying they can spend more time with and provide higher-quality care to their patients. Health advocates are skeptical, worrying that only the wealthy will benefit from this system.

In Wichita, Kansas, 32-year old family physician Doug Nunamaker switched to a cash-only basis in 2010 after taking insurance for five years. (“Cash-only” is a loose description. Nunamaker accepts payment by debit or credit card too.)

[..]

Under the traditional health insurance system, a large staff was required just to navigate all the paperwork, he said. That resulted in high overhead, forcing doctors like Nunamaker to take on more patients to cover costs. Plus, the amount insurance companies were willing to pay for procedures was declining, leading to a vicious cycle. “The paperwork, the hassles, it just got to be overwhelming,” Nunamaker said. “We knew that we had to find a better way to practice.”

So Nunamaker and his partner set up a membership-based practice called Atlas M.D. — a nod to free-market champion Ayn Rand’s book Atlas Shrugged. Under the membership plan — also known as “concierge” medicine — each patient pays a flat monthly fee to have unlimited access to the doctors and any service they can provide in the office, such as EKGs or stitches.

The fee varies depending on age. For kids, it’s $10 a month. For adults up to age 44, it’s $50 a month. Senior citizens pay $100.

The office has negotiated deals for services outside the office. By cutting out the middleman, Nunamaker said he can get a cholesterol test done for $3, versus the $90 the lab company he works with once billed to insurance carriers. An MRI can be had for $400, compared to a typical billed rate of $2,000 or more.

[…]

Kevin Petersen, a Las Vegas-based general surgeon, stopped taking insurance in 2005. Petersen named the same reasons as Nunamaker: too much paperwork and overhead, declining payments from insurance companies, and a general loss of control. “The insurance industry took over my practice,” he said. “They were telling me what procedures I could do, who I could treat — I basically became their employee.”

Now Petersen does hernia operations for $5,000 a pop, which includes anesthesia, operating room time and follow-up visits. He negotiates special rates for the anesthesiologist and the operating room, and is able to provide the service for about a third of what a patient might pay otherwise.

Many of his patients are early retirees who are not yet eligible for Medicare but can’t afford a full-fledged health insurance plan, he said, and business is booming. “My practice at this point is the best it’s been in my 26-year career,” he said. “By far.”

While the cash-only model may please doctors, some question whether it’s good for middle- and low-income people. Kathleen Stoll, director of health policy at the consumer advocacy group Families U.S.A., didn’t want to speak directly to either Petersen’s or Nunamaker’s practice, as she didn’t know the specifics of each.

But in general, she fears that doctors who switch to a cash-only model will drive away the patients who can’t afford a monthly membership fee or thousands of dollars for an operation. “They cherry-pick among their patient population to serve only the wealthier ones,” Stoll said. “It certainly creates a barrier to care.”

(emphasis added)

Obviously, both the named and unnamed 'health advocates' and worriers have it completely wrong. People who don't have to pay thousands of dollars for health insurance actually can afford 'thousands of dollars for an operation' that costs only one third of what it would otherwise cost. It is not only the wealthy who can afford this free market care (besides, people who don't want it have the option to continue with the existing system).

Look at those prices! A cholesterol test for “$3 instead of $90” – that is more than 96% less! An MRI for $400 instead of “$2,000 or more” (usually will be 'or more')? Not to mention the fact that these doctors now have more time to actually care for their patients properly. What's not to like?

A Win-Win By Mistake?

Imagine for a moment what might happen if the government were to get out of healthcare altogether and there would be free competition between all health care service providers. What would happen to prices in that case? It is probably fair to assume that they would come down precipitously even from the low prices free market doctors are already able to obtain for their patients nowadays.

It is actually a good bet that the onerous red tape and the likely explosion in costs due to Obamacare will accelerate the move toward a free market in health care – unless the government explicitly forbids it, that is (unfortunately we cannot rule out completely that such tyrannical steps will eventually be taken – the government generally doesn't like it when its 'help' is refused).

If so, the Obamacare Act could turn out to become a win-win by mistake so to speak, as more and more people decide to opt out of the system. It seems clear that the free market solution is preferable to the cartelized health care system imposed by government and the lobbyists that have co-written the laws. The doctors portrayed in the article above are leading by example, and we expect their ranks to swell in coming years.

the Insurance industry has scared the living piss out of people by telling them if you have a medical emergency you can go broke after you get the bills. They are the ones that have driven up the damn cost so the execs can make millions a year. I know so many good doctors that will see patients and help them out even if they don't have insurance. The Amount they make ($40-50) from a patient who just gives cash goes further then the fight to collect from the insurance companies

Ban the issuance of ALL types of insurance. Think about it. Personal responsibility would rule. Without medical insurance, the costs of care would crater. No person is paying $40,000 of a dose of a drug. No more veggies living on ventilators. No malpractice cases, no unneeded tests to protect from malpractice, no more $3,000 screws, etc. etc.

This wouldn't be a problem if medical insurance was actually insurance, instead of a giant billing scam.

Imagine a health insurance policy with a $10,000 annual deductible, and you can go to any doctor you want. The premium would be low because the vast majority of people wouldn't exceed the deductible. You could negotiate with the doctor on price because you're paying for it up to $10k. Your doctor bills you, and you submit your paid invoice to your insurance company for credit against the deductible limit. Then if something catastrophic happens, you don't go bankrupt. THAT is insurance. This $10 copay and $400 generic prescription crap is a joke.

Yep . . . everyone is right about healthcare costs in a truly free market. People used to pay themselves and it was affordable. And their doc sometimes even made house calls. Then the various crooks set up their racket and the prices escalated.

Of course the new Commie 'care' aint about health care at all. Its about ripping off the American people.

Cyprus got 'bail ins' as a means to be robbed. They are using this bill to accomplish the same purpose.

I've been to a doctor once in the past 20 years. When I went for a general checkup, he said I was young and healthy and to come back in a few years.

I can put away savings and pay for medical emergencies as I age. I don't need a fucking nanny state fining me for the ignorance of others. I eat properly (not what the food pyramid suggests) and I don't have any health issues.

Don't make me a virtual suggar daddy for those who lead lifestyles that drive them into sickness. Learn about health/fitness and nutrition and many of your perceived problems will be addressed. Get your head out of the matrix.

Think of some of those things that are mandatory - - - including 'education' for children & this new commie-care. Neither had much public support when first put in place, but the oligarchs put them in place anyway. These programs serve their narrow interests. Public education was about dumbing down the public to make them compliant workers in the factories and no future threat to the ruling 'elites'. It was a tool put in place since the 1890s-early 1900s. The healthcare bill is ultimately about draining away peoples money/independence and is a tool for control and population reduction. - - - If these statements seem incredible, read the book The Underground History of American Education by John Taylor Gatto. It can be read for free at johntaylorgatto.com/chapters

Great point! THIS is the biggie: The malpractice suits! It's partly "one of the reasons" health insurance premiums began to rise. I remember it starting in 1970's. Trial lawyers began this cottage industry of suing doctors. Doctors began to be forced to practice "CYA medicine". Got a headache? Doc says, "Gotta have a CT scan". This drove up costs fast! Especially when technology grew. (Not giving insurance companies a pass here...just saying it was a big part of the beginning of the end of cheap insurance and a no-problem healthcare system we had here in America.

I don't want to disparage doctors, but the MAIN reason for so many lawsuits is because doctors and hospitals make enormous amounts of mistakes that lead to patient deaths....something between 100,000 to 400,000 deaths per year.

That's PREVENTABLE mistakes.

Now, if you want to argue that tort law (i.e., negligence claims) should go away, or that "assumption of risk" should apply to every aspect of life--from jumping out of an airplane to going to the doctor--then argue that.

I don't want tort law to go away any more than I want criminal law to go away. A crime is a criminal wrong committed against a person, for which the state will prosecute on behalf of the person. A tort is a CIVIL wrong committed against a person, for which the person can sue for money to recover their damages (and yes, punish the wrongdoer).

It's funny to me that the ONLY time we hear a cry for "tort reform," it's over healthcare. It's a major Republican talking point, and they are wrong. In any case, there was a study done by one of the think tanks that concluded that medical malpractice suits are an extremely small percentage of overall healthcare costs. Insignificant.

Free markets will fix this. Nothing else.

To the person I replied to: this was not meant as a rant against you! I just like facts and clarity. :)

The whole structure of medicine as practiced today needs to be examined. The allopathic medicine ('drug em or cut em open') model was given its legalized near monopoloy as the result of certain oligarch interests, in particular - Rockefeller based. More than 250,000 Americans are killed by this system each year. The CDC and FDA (like so many other govt agencies) are in bed with the corporate interests they are supposed to regulate.

Within this system, if a doc is sued because his training taught him to prescribe a medicine that was inadequately tested so killed a patient . . . . does it make sense to blame the tort system, (bad as it is) ? Or does it make sense to re-examine the whole medical structure and open it up to competition and the free choice of patients ?

And knowing the thinking of some of those oligarchs who first financed and promoted the near monopoly of allopathic medicine, we may wonder if it produces the results intended. It is likely that many more than 250,000 Americans will die as a result of the new system being implemented.

My doctor stopped taking Medicare. I was in there for a check up. I paid cash money. An old lady was crying to the staff. Shame. She mentioned ObamaCare and said she said she thought he would never do that. She actually said "Obama said he would take care of us." Dumb old bag.

Tell some people AARP is just an insurance rip off and that they favored O-care and they just don't believe it. Such naive forever-children. They just can't believe theyre are some crooks and evil muthers loose in the world.

I hear the same refrain all over town, now (city in Upstate, NY). Old people who voted for these turds, and supported ObamasCare's passage, are bitching and moaning 'cuz the ins. co's are dumping them. Example: MVP Health is dumping retirees who are on Medicare, and telling them to go get their health coverage with a different company.

I know what you mean. I know an elderly man who is an old hardcore Dem. He has a sickly wife and a mentally disabled daughter. He voted for O cause he's always voted Dem. He and his family are going to be devastated by Fascist -'care'.

And in a few years you can bet theyll be rolling out mandatory vaccines and 'mental health evaluations'. The 'less productive' will be sold 'death with dignity'. This is their Nazi wet dream.

Yes, and the same for his elderly wife who has dementia from a stroke.

I have no sympathy for younger people who are dumbf*cks. But its sad for old people who are more trusting, and less capable of dealing with new information. They have a tough time with the idea that 'their country' and the 'leadership' isn't what they were always taught. I've told elderly relatives about AARP and they are only now seeing how they have been lied to and screwed over. "You mean its really not an organization to help us old people ?"

Horrible thing to say about an old woman. You don't know her circumstances. Have more respect for the elderly. There is ONE reason the Dems always chant about "Seniors". It's because they know they are vulnerable. It's difficult to get old and feel more vulnerable. You'll be there one day.

My dr. is closing her office on 10/31. I suspect it's an ACA thing, although she's blaming the other Dr's leaving the practice. I've heard from family that two of their Dr's are closing by the end of the year

We were there on a trip and my hubby needed stiches in his thumb the emergency room charged us $18 and my husband still has his thumb with no visible scars. We were so overwhelmed we send the doctor a gift.

Curently in RSA. A physical including blood tests was $82 in a private clinic

Bless those folks at that facility. Hopefully this is where we are headed but Obama will bring in third world witch doctors. SEIU and ACORN will run our healthcare.

About 25+ years ago - I twisted my ankle at my job in their warehouse. It was not that bad. I went home and when I went to sleep it starting hurting like hell. I drove myself to the hospital I was born in, run by the Catholic church. This was at about 1:30 am. They looked at it and gave me an extra strength Tylenol. The bill was over $150. $150 today and back then was big bucks. I had health insurance but if I used it, it would be a workman's comp claim. Like a dope I said it was twisted from work.

Well, if you claim workman's comp - you are pretty much unemployable after that. So I forked over $150 for a Tylenol. Inflation adjusted that is probably $300 today.

How bad are the NHS hospitals? I heard they are unionized and a pretty bad. Someone compared them to field hospitals in the Crimean War. I also heard that islamics in teh Uk get their own NEW and separate facilities.

Oh - ObamaCare is a jizya or a tax on non-muslims by muslims because muslims are exempt. What does "exempt" mean? My guess is it is all FREE for them.

The AMA is like AARP. It is bunch of insurance agents and a few docs from acedemia. Very few practicing physicians are members. It is self funding from selling insurance and gifts from long dead donors. A bunch of old commies and political hacks. The fuckers sold medicine down the river when they backed Obama.

I admittedly live in bumfuck-nowhere, but this has been common around here for awhile. Carillion bought out most private practices and started abusing their near-monopoly powers, the bettter docs quit.

Then, some of them formed a private practice that has all the properties described above - and more. For one thing, they do a better job with preventative care up front. For another, they not only work for cash, but for barter in some cases. Most of them are near-retired, and don't come to the office unless there's a particular need for their speciality, so the office is "manned" by a couple of women, one the primary care doc herself, who sets up deals with any of the specialists as needed - not so often, as she's pretty darn good herself.

And, they'll even work for barter, not just cash. They were going along great, but this electronic health care records mandate is crushing. Since I'm a computer guy, I might just set up healthcare for life by setting that all up for them. The thing is, would O'care actually regard this as legit, and give me an out from that horrible mess?

Will they let the self-insured (me, everytime I've needed care, I've not been covered, and I always pay myself, I'm not a deadbeat) off?

Or, as seems obvious, is the conflation by big-insurance health insurance with "access to medical care" the real point of all this crap? They've never provided me with even one tiny bit of healthcare (or sick-care), ever, yet I've had some care over a rather long lifetime.

There's gotta be some "out" here. I can't afford O'care, and I don't spend anywhere near what it costs as is. I chose to live healthy, and gut lucky in genes. I don't want a subsidy, and in return, I don't want to give one to those fatties at walmart who CHOSE to be unhealthy.

The real problem is that insurance is socialism, the redistribution of wealth form the healthy to the sick, and the government is the single largest insurer in the world, and they want it all! Socialism does not work in a fractured society with deliberate divisive politics to be sure none of us share in ANY common goal. We are in a fuck anyone you can societal system and th eonly thing that will slow that down is competition.

Teddy Kennedy was largely responsible for the creation of HMO's, Medicare and Medicaid drove up costs to the point where paying cash at the doctor was problematic for many, roughly 40 years ago or so.

The HMO's and ins. co's are in bed with the government, the damn bill was written by attorneys and consultants who work for Big Healthcare. The smarter amongst the execs, consultants, and lawyers know this is their last chance to cash in on the U.S. government's latest fuck up, and it's the biggest one yet, before we go to single-payer.

Somewhere along the line they went from selling insurance to collecting cuts from routine procedures like dental check ups and X-rays. People (many of them) were happy to pay more for insurance so that they didn't have to pay the dentist or doctor for the "full" cost of a regular visit; of course the insurance company has to be paid for their service as well as the practioner. When the insurance companies stumbled upon this gold mine they must have thought real hard about how many services like this they could screw the feeble minded with.

Well, I don't care one way or the other what YOU get. I only care about the Big-Gov scams I've got. I'm a few years away from the ultimate OldFart crony-socialist medical scam so I'm going to get all the free motor scooters, hip-replacements, and dick-implants I'm entitled too.

Everybody LOVES the Big-Gov crony-socialists scam they are living off of.

Yeah, because the entitlements you voted for yourself will be aroudn when I turn 65! Good one, gramps!

Not yet 65, but WHEN did any of us vote to get Entitlements?,THEY were forcibly taken from OUR paychecks, just like FED income taxes.Good job doing Oboombas work, class warfare between the generations!.

Was it possible, in 2012 or 2008, to challenge the results of the vote counting? Could anyone go to more than a handful of precinct and say "The vote count is suspect we demand an audit of the votes?" You seem simple so I will answer the question for you. In the vast majority of precincts it is impossible to audit the vote, it is impossible to confirm that the talley's presented to the public are correct. The public is told the results and that is the end of it. The actual voting is theater. This is intentional. No one would design an election system wqhere the reported results are not auditable unless it was by intent.

They stole more than 95% of your earnings and savings through bankster money printing and then stole more than half of that in various taxes.

And now people fight among themselves for the table scraps.

(Their own money taken from them, but now labeled 'entitlements' by the propaganda machine. What bold liars they are.)

How did this all take place & when did it start ? A lot further back than this (completely horrible) administration.

Generations of Americans, including the current one, didn't pay enough attention and tolerated too much. So, they slowly lost their Liberty, a small step at a time. Probably the key was the instituting of mandatory public 'education', the tool for dumbing down the American citizenry. Purposely they were no longer taught critical thinking skills or their history. The creativity and independent spirit that used to be noted in Americans, was slowly ground away. So now many are unable to think for themselves; they merely parrot what they see/hear from the media. They are easily manipulated to fight among themselves while their freedom and prosperity are stolen from them.

Thomas Jefferson warned during the American Revolution:

"From the conclusion of the war we shall be going down hill. It will not be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. "

Well they went to Woodstock so they are special. F them and their young college aged grandchildren and children who voted for this. Let their children and grandchildren take care of them. Or they can go off and die. The kids and grandkids could care less. They voted for this. F them.

Sounds fair except theft ain't fair either. We are going to have to accept that we have been robbed and the money was spent on hookers and blow. If we try to squeeze this cash out of younger generations, they will be taking us to the "showers", if you get my drift. Not to mention it will likely destroy what little is left of the economy.

Yep . . . the moneys gone. There are no funds. Trillions stolen from the American citizenry in numerous scams. Just think what would have happened if more than 95% of you & your family's earnings and savings hadnt been stolen through money printing inflation over the last century. Just think what would have happened if half of what paltry sum was left hadn't been stolen in taxes. Just think how much better off you would have been if your sons hadnt been sent overseas to fight multiple foreign wars to benefit narrow interests.

Might people just maybe have been able to pay for their own healthcare and retirement if they had made and kept 40-50 times more than they earned through the years ?

In the year 2001, Alan GreenZIRP dropped the Fed Funds rate from 6% to under 2% and introduced all those who were saving or (God forbid) retiring around the turn of the century to NEGATIVE REAL INTEREST RATES (beginning at the short end of the curve).

Compound interest is great when it's working for you, and it's a bitch when works against you.

Just HOW MUCH is someone supposed to save for retirement, if they're not some public sector leach with an overly generous defined benefit pension and an inflated COLAs that someone else is picking up the tab for?

If PROFESSIONAL pension managers can't hit the 5% "real" return (8% nominal) that they model, even with the derivatives, leverage and other tools at their their disposal, how is Granny supposed to do it when her age and risk profile dictate she should be underweight equities (and conservative equities at that) and overweight high quality (really negative yield) bonds?

T W E L V E Y E A R S of negative real returns...

Now if you want to wine about that lazy baby boomer generation, and the Presidents from it who have facilited the Fed's transformation of retirees into debt-slaves and beggars at the hand of Uncle Sam...

Here is the ultimate plan. Renounce citizenship, go to Mexico on vacation. then come back as an illegal.

Amnesty, free healthcare, no taxes, food stamps, hell even VOTE!, collect unemployment, and heck why not disability thanks to binder and binder, all while working your own cash biz and wire money to an international acct.

“Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.” [Article 25 (1), Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)]

It sounds like the implicit meaning in that declaration is that the UN will be glad to pay for everyone's medical expenses, as well as food, clothing, housing, unemployment, disability, and retirement. If everyone had to purchase their human rights, they wouldn't really be rights, and since they don't spell out exactly who will be paying for everything, the only reasonable conclusion is that the UN will pay for it all.

Probably all you need to do is submit an invoice to the UN with some legalese mumbo jumbo like:

Typical collectivist crap. As far as I'm concerned, no one has a right to anything that needs my money to provide. I'll reconsider when I see all those rich Progressives like Gore, the Clintons, Soros, Alec Baldwin, etc. take vows of poverty and give what they have to help the poor. Then I'll still maintain that my property is mine to do with as I choose.

No has a right to anything really. Sure, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I will grant you those. Anything else, especially if it costs money, doesn't fall anywhere near a right. The government feels they have the right to take your earnings by force. What I don't understand is why they are allowed to tax my wage. My wage is in exchange for my labor. That is a fair and equitable trade between me and another party. Why is the .gov even involved in that? (I am only kidding, I know I am a slave. I will shut up now.) There is no law that says I have to file though.

dude, no need to worry about me. i'm watching your train wreck from the other side of the planet. you might want to watch out for your armed forces and security state turned against you:

The U.S. Army’s Operating Concept 2016-2028 was issued in August 2010 with three goals. First, it aims to portray how future Army forces will conduct operations as part of a joint force to deter conflict, prevail in war, and succeed in a range of contingencies, at home and abroad. Second, the concept describes the employment of Army forces at the tactical and operational levels of war between 2016 and 2028. Third, in broad terms the concept describes how Army headquarters, from theater army to division, organize and use their forces. The concept goes on to describe the major categories of Army operations, identify the capabilities required of Army forces, and guide how force development should be prioritized. The goal of this concept is to establish a common frame of reference for thinking about how the US Army will conduct full spectrum operations in the coming two decades (US Army Training and Doctrine Command, The Army Operating Concept 2016 – 2028, TRADOC Pamphlet 525-3-1, dated 19 August 2010, p. iii. Hereafter cited as TD Pam 525-3-1. The Army defines full spectrum operations as the combination of offensive, defensive, and either stability operations overseas or civil support operations on U.S. soil).

A key and understudied aspect of full spectrum operations is how to conduct these operations within American borders. If we face a period of persistent global conflict as outlined in successive National Security Strategy documents, then Army officers are professionally obligated to consider the conduct of operations on U.S. soil. Army capstone and operating concepts must provide guidance concerning how the Army will conduct the range of operations required to defend the republic at home. In this paper, we posit a scenario in which a group of political reactionaries take over a strategically positioned town and have the tacit support of not only local law enforcement but also state government officials, right up to the governor. Under present law, which initially stemmed from bad feelings about Reconstruction, the military’s domestic role is highly circumscribed. In the situation we lay out below, even though the governor refuses to seek federal help to quell the uprising (the usual channel for military assistance), the Constitution allows the president broad leeway in times of insurrection. Citing the precedents of Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War and Dwight D. Eisenhower sending troops to Little Rock in 1957, the president mobilizes the military and the Department of Homeland Security, to regain control of the city. This scenario requires us to consider how domestic intelligence is gathered and shared, the role of local law enforcement (to the extent that it supports the operation), the scope and limits of the Insurrection Act--for example maintaining a military chain of command but in support of the Attorney General as the Department of Justice is the Lead Federal Agency (LFA) under the conditions of the Act--and the roles of the local, national, and international media.

The Scenario (2016)

The Great Recession of the early twenty-first century lasts far longer than anyone anticipated. After a change in control of the White House and Congress in 2012, the governing party cuts off all funding that had been dedicated to boosting the economy or toward relief. The United States economy has flatlined, much like Japan’s in the 1990s, for the better part of a decade. By 2016, the economy shows signs of reawakening, but the middle and lower-middle classes have yet to experience much in the way of job growth or pay raises. Unemployment continues to hover perilously close to double digits, small businesses cannot meet bankers’ terms to borrow money, and taxes on the middle class remain relatively high. A high-profile and vocal minority has directed the public’s fear and frustration at nonwhites and immigrants. After almost ten years of race-baiting and immigrant-bashing by right-wing demagogues, nearly one in five Americans reports being vehemently opposed to immigration, legal or illegal, and even U.S.-born nonwhites have become occasional targets for mobs of angry whites.

In May 2016 an extremist militia motivated by the goals of the “tea party” movement takes over the government of Darlington, South Carolina, occupying City Hall, disbanding the city council, and placing the mayor under house arrest. Activists remove the chief of police and either disarm local police and county sheriff departments or discourage them from interfering. In truth, this is hardly necessary. Many law enforcement officials already are sympathetic to the tea party’s agenda, know many of the people involved, and have made clear they will not challenge the takeover. The militia members are organized and have a relatively well thought-out plan of action.

With Darlington under their control, militia members quickly move beyond the city limits to establish “check points” – in reality, something more like choke points -- on major transportation lines. Traffic on I-95, the East Coast’s main north-south artery; I-20; and commercial and passenger rail lines are stopped and searched, allegedly for “illegal aliens.” Citizens who complain are immediately detained. Activists also collect “tolls” from drivers, ostensibly to maintain public schools and various city and county programs, but evidence suggests the money is actually going toward quickly increasing stores of heavy weapons and ammunition. They also take over the town web site and use social media sites to get their message out unrestricted.

When the leaders of the group hold a press conference to announce their goals, they invoke the Declaration of Independence and argue that the current form of the federal government is not deriving its “just powers from the consent of the governed” but is actually “destructive to these ends.” Therefore, they say, the people can alter or abolish the existing government and replace it with another that, in the words of the Declaration, “shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” While mainstream politicians and citizens react with alarm, the “tea party” insurrectionists in South Carolina enjoy a groundswell of support from other tea party groups, militias, racist organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan, anti-immigrant associations such as the Minutemen, and other right-wing groups. At the press conference the masked militia members’ uniforms sport a unit seal with a man wearing a tricorn hat and carrying a musket over the motto “Today’s Minutemen.” When a reporter asked the leaders who are the “red coats” the spokesman answered, “I don’t know who the redcoats are…it could be federal troops.” Experts warn that while these groups heretofore have been considered weak and marginal, the rapid coalescence among them poses a genuine national threat.

The mayor of Darlington calls the governor and his congressman. He cannot act to counter the efforts of the local tea party because he is confined to his home and under guard. The governor, who ran on a platform that professed sympathy with tea party goals, is reluctant to confront the militia directly. He refuses to call out the National Guard. He has the State Police monitor the roadblocks and checkpoints on the interstate and state roads but does not order the authorities to take further action. In public the governor calls for calm and proposes talks with the local tea party to resolve issues. Privately, he sends word through aides asking the federal government to act to restore order. Due to his previous stance and the appearance of being “pro” tea party goals the governor has little political room to maneuver.

The Department of Homeland Security responds to the governor’s request by asking for defense support to civil law enforcement. After the Department of Justice states that the conditions in Darlington and surrounding areas meet the conditions necessary to invoke the Insurrection Act, the President invokes it. [source, and more]

One of capitalism's most durable myths is that it has reduced human toil. This myth is typically defended by a comparison of the modern forty-hour week with its seventy- or eighty-hour counterpart in the nineteenth century. The implicit -- but rarely articulated -- assumption is that the eighty-hour standard has prevailed for centuries. The comparison conjures up the dreary life of medieval peasants, toiling steadily from dawn to dusk. We are asked to imagine the journeyman artisan in a cold, damp garret, rising even before the sun, laboring by candlelight late into the night.

These images are backward projections of modern work patterns. And they are false. Before capitalism, most people did not work very long hours at all. The tempo of life was slow, even leisurely; the pace of work relaxed. Our ancestors may not have been rich, but they had an abundance of leisure. When capitalism raised their incomes, it also took away their time. Indeed, there is good reason to believe that working hours in the mid-nineteenth century constitute the most prodigious work effort in the entire history of humankind. [source]

IDIOT.There is no "before capitalism" - it was first. The ability to use your own time & skills as you chose & the power to consent to trade or not trade with others came before all else & capitalism is nothing else but those abilities."Our ancestors may not have been rich, but they had an abundance of leisure."Absolutely untrue. Every waking second was spent hunting food & preparing shelter to ensure you didn't die in your sleep of hunger or from the cold, much less predator animals that had no fear of GUNS shooting them since there weren't any.

healthcare IS A RIGHT.But it's not a right to the property, time, energy or skills of others.The right to healthcare is the right to knowledge, to make medicine & consume it as you please, to share information you have already.Preventative healthcare is the most powerful & freemarket medicine means being able to make your own medicine & not stopped by regulations from doing so and selling or consuming it.

What about when the assholes start filing suit against these doctors and taking all their time in court and the money for malpractice insurance. Soon enough the doctors will start forming their own companies that will begin to look like HMO's or whatever. Then the prices go up and up so they can protect themselves. Just sayin. I love the idea and will go see these docs and drop insurance if it catches on.

The doctors put up a sign that they carry no malpractice insurance and get the patients to sign a waiver. If the patients do not like it - leave. I went to see an old guy who was an ear, eyes, nose and throat. He had that sign. He was a good guy. I was fine and he said it took me five minutes to check you. No charge.

Send the poor and low income folks to Canada for healthcare. It would be cheaper to buy them bus tickets than to actually provide healthcare. Send the illegal immigrants back where they came from, and let their original countries pay for them.

If a doctor wants to be paid $30 for a patient visit he knows that the insurance company is only going to pay X% of the submitted bill. So the $30 visit gets increased to $125.00 so that the doctor can clear $30 for the 10 min he saw the patient and have $10 for administrative costs for the staff that handles the insurance billing.

Remove the insurance and the doctor can just bill the client $30 directly and save a ton of time and hassle.

We all know what will happen next if this catches on... Congress will pass a law making it illegal to perform medicine outside of Obamacare. Why pay $30 when you can pay 5x that to support layer upon layer of beaurocracy that offers no benefit at all to the paitent.

Free market healthcare would alllow for the purchase of catastrophic only plans (literally catastrophic) that would only cover major emergencies. The cost should be quite cheap relative to what is paid now.

nope. he is right. i have high deductible plan. when i go to the doctor, he has a $50 cash office fee. he gave me a 'shot' for sinus and wrote me a script. walked out $70 in.

oh yeah, his office is 'organized'...as in, you walk up, sign your name, at your appt time you are actually called back, vitals measured, into the room, doc walks in, sits down, small talk for a minute, discusses condition, reviews chart, makes a diagnosis, then lets you go....pretty simple. seems the spacing is about 10min per patient. i was in the waiting area with an average of 2 other people. smooth operation. *oh yeah, my sister started using him a few years back b/c she was sick/hurting for weeks and went to multiple other doctors. this guy brought her in, objectively listened to her, and ordered test. first time to him he successfully diagnosed her with lyme disease...where her case we reviewed by the CDC and was 1 of 3 confirmed cases in the state that year.

Back in the day (a long time back) IEEE offered such a plan to members. It didn't cost diddly (10's of bucks a year), and only paid out for genuine catastrophies. You were on your own for the rest, as it should be - and at the time, most engineers made enough for that not to be a problem. And it incentivised being basically healthy in your habits.

I do the same thing with cars. Since I always buy them with cash, I skip the comprehensive insurance, getting only liability. This incentivises me to not have wrecks that are my own fault. Works for me...

"But in general, she fears that doctors who switch to a cash-only model will drive away the patients who can't afford a monthy membership fee or thousands of dollars for an operation."

Go fuck yourself with a splintered dildo, Kathleen Stoll. You think anybody out there wants to pay $398 a month for insurance with a $6247 deductible instead of paying $50 a month for concierge medicine membership and $5000 for that hernia operation? I know math is hard, but you save $5K with option 2. As an added bonus, your concierge doctor won't post the details of your hernia operation on a central medical records website and he won't ask you to get an RFID implanted in your penis.

Why is it that the douchebaggiest women in the health care industry all share the name of Kathleen?

I believe strongly that the government will try to outlaw medical practice outside of obamacare. that's what they did when they licensed practitioners......... this is just another step in that process. The ultimate goal is control............. not your health CARE.

It amazes me that even today, after all the media coverage, nobody is asking the big question.

"Who wrote Obamacare, (the PPACA)?"

Go on, google it.

The name that pops up is that of one Liz Fowler. She's a senior VP for Wellpoint, a medical insurance company. The PPACA is not for the benefit of Americans, it's to save the insurance companies. Wise up.

Best quote I saw was - "Obamacare is not intended to make health insurance more affordable for the American people. It is designed to make the American people more affordable for the health insurance industry."

They don't have to refuse it they will just make you wait 6 months for an appointment. Most patients will get the hint or someone will take advantage of a niche and hoover up the majority of the insurance only people charging accordingly to deal with the paperwork and red tape.

Before the AMA (mafia) there was a 'Lodge System'. A group of workers -- lodge or union or whatever -- would hire a doctor(s) for a regular fee to look after all GP needs of the group. I'm sure the Obummer legistlation precludes this now, but I wonder.

I wish so bad this would take hold and become common, but something tells me these doctors will be labled "rogue" or whatever and they will be demonized in order to get them to stop. Cash-n-cary doctors may find it hard to renew thier licences to practice.

My dentist allows cash, and takes off a full 25% off the normal prices. I love it.